15-22: first round losers based on their Regular season record (RSR)23 - 26: second round losers based on their RSR27 - 28: conference final losers based on RSR29: Stanley Cup Runner Up30: Stanley Cup Winner

That being said, Vancouver had the best record of all teams who were knocked out in the 2nd round, which means they'll have the 22nd pick,

I actually had this slightly wrong. Here it is (sort of) from an NHL.com article on the 2009 draft:

By winning the Stanley Cup, the Penguins earned the No. 30 selection in the first round of the June 26-27 selection process. The Red Wings will pick No. 29.

While it's likely there will be some movement between now and draft night, the order currently remains the same for the first 14 picks as it did the night of the draft lottery -- the New York Islanders will pick first, followed by the Tampa Bay Lightning, Colorado Avalanche, Atlanta Thrashers and Los Angeles Kings.

Phoenix, Toronto, Dallas, Ottawa and Edmonton round out the top 10, followed by Nashville, Minnesota, Buffalo and Florida among teams that missed the postseason.

The order for the rest of the selections was set on playoff performance. The next seven spots went to teams that lost in the first two rounds based on regular-season points, which means the Anaheim Ducks will pick 15th, followed by Columbus, St. Louis, Montreal and the New York Rangers.

Calgary will pick No. 20; they had the option of sending this year's first-round pick or next year's to Phoenix as part of the Olli Jokinen deal. Philadelphia will pick No. 21.

The next five spots went to division winners that lost in the first two rounds, based on regular-season points, which means Vancouver will pick at No. 22, followed by New Jersey, Washington and Boston.

The Islanders, the only team with two first-round picks, will select No. 26, which would have been San Jose's spot. The Sharks sent the much-traveled pick to Tampa Bay as part of the Dan Boyle trade last July. The Lightning sent the pick to Ottawa as part of the Andrej Meszaros deal in August, and Ottawa dealt the pick to the Islanders in exchange for Mike Comrie and Chris Campoli in February.

The Carolina Hurricanes, who lost to Pittsburgh in the Eastern Conference Finals, will pick at No. 27, and the Chicago Blackhawks, who lost in the Western Conference Finals, will pick No. 28.

So it goes like this :

1-14: Teams not qualifying for playoffs15-X: Teams losing in first and second rounds of playoffs that did not win their divisonX+1-26: Teams losing in the first and second rounds of playoffs that were division winners27-28: Conference finals losers29: Stanley Cup Finals loser30: Stanley Cup winner

Each group with more than one team is organized in reverse order of regular season standings - and obviously 1-15 has the lottery as well.

So Vancouver should pick 26th no matter what being the 1&2 round loser with the highest spot in the regular season standings (meaning they also won their division), whereas Detroit can pick no lower than 23rd (since three division winners are out already - for example Florida will draft lower despite finishing the season with fewer points as they won their division).

the Dogsalmon wrote:does it really matter...we cant draft worth shit...never have...some poor 18 year old kid will get picked by us and left to mature(aka rot) in the minors until he is 26 or 27...thats how we draft...

You should not have opened that box , although I agree with you to some point, the Canucks have drafted better over the past couple of years the biggest issue is that AV does not give young guys a chance to play.

One mistake and you ride the pine while vets can make bone head plays game after game and they don't miss a shift.

Only four or five more years until Chris Tanev can stop rotting in the minors.

As for the "AV doesn't like young guys" trope, in addition to Tanev we have Mason Raymond, Jannik Hansen and Alex Edler who before 27 have played 328, 271 and 386 NHL games respectively and have each had pretty significant roles on the team for years.

What AV doesn't seem to like is one dimensional players, and many young players have very incomplete games. Sergei Shirokov, Cody Hodgson, etc. It just wouldn't be a Canucks season without a player like this having a productive stretch before being benched by the coach for their poor overall game and the coach being subsequently raked over the coals by fans.. this year was Hodgson, last year was Shirokov with a goal in his two games, the year before that was Grabner, and the year before if I recall it was Kyle Wellwood starting the year off with several points before being chewed out for his incomplete game.

The only player of that group who will become a key player anywhere is Hodgson, Wellwood to his credit rounded out his game and is still bouncing around the league. Michael Grabner will probably become motivated to play the way he can again sometime near the end of his current long-term contract.

Reefer2 wrote:You should not have opened that box , although I agree with you to some point, the Canucks have drafted better over the past couple of years the biggest issue is that AV does not give young guys a chance to play.

One mistake and you ride the pine while vets can make bone head plays game after game and they don't miss a shift.

How come some many people are down on Vinyo? I don't really understand this.We've had the most success ever as a franchise under him and I fail to see the logic in going in a different direction just like that.You're not the only one dog. I've heard this with so many fans and I always feel that it's so strange.

a monkey could have coached the Canucks the last 2 seasons and still won regularly...Vigneault gets outcoached when the going gets tough...cant match lines....cant motivate...only recently learned how to pull the starter when its obvious to any fan that he is off(leaving Lou in when he is stinking up the joint)...as I have said before...Secretariat would have won no matter who the jockey was(Ron Turcotte)...

Last edited by the Dogsalmon on Sat May 05, 2012 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Speaking of the draft and the Oilers, anyone find it slightly fishy that Lowe brought Ryan Murray in for a free looksee? Is Lowe's position with the team to help it win or help him decide who to draft? Not that it matters, they'll be #1 again next year.

the Dogsalmon wrote:a monkey could have coached the Canucks the last 2 seasons and still won regularly...Vigneault gets outcoached when the going gets tough...cant match lines....cant motivate...only recently learned how to pull the starter when its obvious to any fan that he is off(leaving Lou in when he is stinking up the joint)...as I have said before...Secretariat would have won no matter who the jockey was(Ron Turcotte)...

I understand that this past playoffs we looked brutal and even the season leading up to it but doesn't he get any credit whatsoever for the teams success the past few years? Is it all the players and we made it to game 7 last June despite him? I have a tough time with that one...

dhabums wrote:Speaking of the draft and the Oilers, anyone find it slightly fishy that Lowe brought Ryan Murray in for a free looksee? Is Lowe's position with the team to help it win or help him decide who to draft? Not that it matters, they'll be #1 again next year.

Uncle dans leg wrote:How come some many people are down on Vinyo? I don't really understand this.We've had the most success ever as a franchise under him and I fail to see the logic in going in a different direction just like that.You're not the only one dog. I've heard this with so many fans and I always feel that it's so strange.

If Sharp scores in OT in game 7 last year does your opinion change on AV? It shouldn't if you really believe he the coach we should go forward with.

Dog said it pretty well, when going gets tough we do not get going. Whether that is on AV or not, something has to change and a coaching change is a pretty big one. It's too bad for Luongo that the only personal award he ever won was given to Vigneault in 2007.